Re: Bluecoat Vs ISA 2004 - Network

This is a discussion on Re: Bluecoat Vs ISA 2004 - Network ; It has been a few days and my anticipation for this informative discussion
has now peaked.
But alas I am surprised and a little disappointed to see that there are no
replies to the subject!!?!!
boo hoo!
"poddman" wrote in ...

Re: Bluecoat Vs ISA 2004

It has been a few days and my anticipation for this informative discussion
has now peaked.
But alas I am surprised and a little disappointed to see that there are no
replies to the subject!!?!!
boo hoo!

"poddman" wrote in message
news:42ddb1b1_3@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
> Well the question is pretty much indicated in the subject for the thread.
> Although this is not quite a firewall question, it is related!
> ( unless you are a buffoon and choose to think that proxys and firewalls
> should have nothing to do with each other! )
> I'm interested to find out the general opinion of bluecoat proxy compared
> to ms ISA 2004.
> I have done a little investigation into the matter, but thought it would
> be good to have a quick discussion why either of them could be better in
> any given scenario!
>
> Well I think ms isa server is great beacuse...
>
>
>
>

Re: Bluecoat Vs ISA 2004

Hello there,

I did a test between BC and ISA2004, ISA has defently improved - console,
http filtering, reporting etc.
Nevertheless Bluecoat is far more "proxy" oriented, the garularity of
filtering, ontrolling and reporting leaves ISA far behined
Now the question is what are your needs - for a small company that needs a
filtering of internet activity ISA is a very good answer, for a large
company with a security policy well defined concering internet use etc, the
BC would be much more usefull.
The same goes for reverse proxy - if the company can invest for BC then this
is a better solution: Secured OS, No need for patching, dedicated device for
dedicated task, very good performances, reporting which is centrelized etc.
if using BC i would recomend to attach the BC AV which is a second device
that scans the traffic for viruses - it would block the virus on the
perimeter instead of on the users PC.
See the 2 links one for ISA the second for BC:http://www.isaserver.org/articles/20...parisonp1.htmlhttp://www.bluecoat.de/CMS/imagescms...tudieID_23.pdf

Hope i helped,
Asher.
"poddman" wrote in message
news:42e43edb$1_1@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
> It has been a few days and my anticipation for this informative discussion
> has now peaked.
> But alas I am surprised and a little disappointed to see that there are no
> replies to the subject!!?!!
> boo hoo!
>
>
> "poddman" wrote in message
> news:42ddb1b1_3@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
> > Well the question is pretty much indicated in the subject for the
thread.
> > Although this is not quite a firewall question, it is related!
> > ( unless you are a buffoon and choose to think that proxys and firewalls
> > should have nothing to do with each other! )
> > I'm interested to find out the general opinion of bluecoat proxy
compared
> > to ms ISA 2004.
> > I have done a little investigation into the matter, but thought it would
> > be good to have a quick discussion why either of them could be better in
> > any given scenario!
> >
> > Well I think ms isa server is great beacuse...
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>